DOCSLIB.ORG

NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment APPENDIX E Biological Resources Assessment This page intentionally left blank. NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment June 2017 Prepared by Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Watershed Resources Group NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PURPOSE................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................. 2 1.3 PROJECT OVERVIEW................................................................................................. 4 1.3.1 NORTH HAIWEE DAM NUMBER 2 ......................................................................... 4 1.3.2 LOS ANGELES AQUEDUCT REALIGNMENT ............................................................ 7 1.3.3 CACTUS FLATS ROAD REALIGNMENT .................................................................. 7 1.4 BORROW SITES ........................................................................................................ 8 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................ 8 2.1 REGIONAL SETTING .................................................................................................. 8 2.2 LOCAL SETTING ....................................................................................................... 8 2.3 PROJECT SETTING.................................................................................................... 9 2.4 NATURAL COMMUNITIES ......................................................................................... 11 2.5 EXPECTED WILDLIFE............................................................................................... 11 3.0 METHODS .................................................................................................................. 11 3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................. 11 3.2 GENERAL HABITAT ASSESSMENT SURVEYS ............................................................. 12 3.2.1 NEW NORTH HAIWEE DAM (NHD2) PROJECT AREA AND BLM DISTURBED .......... 12 3.2.2 BORROW SITE 15 ............................................................................................ 15 3.2.3 BORROW SITE 24 ............................................................................................ 15 3.3 WETLANDS AND JURISDICTIONAL AREAS ................................................................. 16 3.4 SPECIAL-STATUS NATURAL COMMUNITIES ............................................................... 16 3.5 NATURAL COMMUNITIES ......................................................................................... 17 3.5.1 SPINY MENODORA SCRUB ................................................................................ 17 3.5.2 FOURWING SALTBUSH SCRUB .......................................................................... 17 3.5.3 JOSHUA TREE WOODLAND ............................................................................... 17 3.5.4 ALLSCALE SCRUB ............................................................................................ 17 3.5.5 CREOSOTE BUSH-BURROBUSH SCRUB ............................................................. 18 3.5.6 TAMARISK THICKETS........................................................................................ 18 3.5.7 BLACK WILLOW THICKETS ............................................................................... 18 i NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment 3.5.8 SHADSCALE SCRUB ......................................................................................... 18 3.5.9 HARDSTEM BULRUSH MARSH ........................................................................... 18 3.6 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND WILDLIFE ................................................................. 19 3.6.1 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS ................................................................................ 19 3.6.2 SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE .............................................................................. 31 3.6.3 INSECTS .......................................................................................................... 42 3.6.4 REPTILES ........................................................................................................ 42 3.6.5 BIRDS ............................................................................................................. 43 3.6.6 MAMMALS-BATS.............................................................................................. 52 3.6.7 OTHER MAMMALS ............................................................................................ 56 3.7 FIELD SURVEY METHODS FOR SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE ........................................ 58 3.7.1 INSECTS .......................................................................................................... 58 3.7.2 REPTILES ........................................................................................................ 58 3.7.3 BIRDS ............................................................................................................. 62 3.7.4 MAMMALS-BATS.............................................................................................. 64 3.7.5 MAMMALS (EXCLUDING BATS) .......................................................................... 67 3.8 NATIVE RESIDENT AND MIGRATORY WILDLIFE .......................................................... 73 4.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................... 74 4.1 WETLANDS AND JURISDICTIONAL AREAS ................................................................. 74 4.2 SPECIAL STATUS NATURAL COMMUNITIES ............................................................... 75 4.3 NATURAL COMMUNITIES AND SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS............................................ 76 4.4 SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE ..................................................................................... 79 4.4.1 INSECTS .......................................................................................................... 79 4.4.2 REPTILES ........................................................................................................ 79 4.4.3 BIRDS ............................................................................................................. 85 4.4.4 MAMMALS-BATS............................................................................................ 100 4.4.5 OTHER MAMMALS .......................................................................................... 102 4.5 NATIVE RESIDENT AND MIGRATORY WILDLIFE ........................................................ 104 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS.................................................................................................... 106 5.1 WETLAND AND JURISDICTIONAL AREAS ................................................................. 106 5.2 NATURAL COMMUNITIES AND SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS.......................................... 107 5.3 SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE ................................................................................... 109 ii NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment 5.3.1 DESERT TORTOISE......................................................................................... 109 5.3.2 BURROWING OWL .......................................................................................... 109 5.3.3 RAPTORS AND BIRDS ..................................................................................... 109 5.3.4 BATS ............................................................................................................ 110 5.3.5 MOHAVE GROUND SQUIRREL.......................................................................... 110 5.3.6 AMERICAN BADGER AND DESERT KIT FOX ....................................................... 111 5.3.7 NATIVE AND RESIDENT MIGRATORY WILDLIFE .................................................. 112 6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................ 112 7.0 LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................. 118 iii NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment FIGURES Figure 1. Regional map................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Proposed project elements ............................................................................................ 5 Figure 3. Cross-section of existing and new dams ...................................................................... 6 Figure 4. Project area overview, NHD2 project area, four associated borrow sites, 2015. .... 10 Figure 5. Desert tortoise transect survey area including ZOI’s around the NHD2. ................. 61 Figure 6. Historic range of the MGS as established in the West Mojave Plan. ....................... 68 Figure 7. MGS CNDDB Occurrence records - trapping grid - Cactus Flat Road spring 2015. 70 Figure 8. MGS CNDDB Occurrence records - trapping grid/borrow site 9, spring 2015. ....... 71 Figure 9. MGS CNDDB Occurrence Records - Trapping Grid/Borrow Site 24, Spring 2015. 72
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
    [Show full text]
  • Horned Scarabs in the North of France WITHIN THIS ISSUE by Olivier Decobert Horned Scarabs of Northern France
    SCARABS Jika ia bau busuk, mereka akan datang. Occasional Issue Number 28 Print ISSN 1937-8343 Online ISSN 1937-8351 June, 2008 Horned Scarabs in the North of France WITHIN THIS ISSUE by Olivier Decobert Horned Scarabs of Northern France ............... 1 [email protected] Horned Scarabs Contest 3 The first scarab is the “Rhinoceros Chrysina Photography .... 5 beetle” Oryctes nasicornis (Linné). Once a friend of mine gave me SOLA Award ..................... 8 some specimens he found near the town of Saint-Venant. They were Aphodiine Classicification Overview .......................... 11 in wood saw-dust with larvae. Despite my own research, I never In Past Years XI............... 14 found again this big beetle in the North of France, but I saw it The Garden Claw ............ 20 several times in the South of my country. North specimens are not very big (male 27 mm, female 30 mm) compared to South where BACK ISSUES a friend of mine said once that Available At These Sites: I live in the North of France. he found a 47 mm male attracted Coleopterists Society This is not the best place for by light. Nevertheless, it is not www.coleopsoc.org/de- biodiversity, however, incredible the same subspecies. Oryctes fault.asp?Action=Show_ scarabs can be found here. I nasicornis belongs to Dynastidae Resources&ID=Scarabs present four species which are family. special because of the presence University of Nebraska www-museum.unl.edu/ of a horn for three of them and a research/entomology/ sort of trident for the last one. Scarabs-Newsletter.htm EDITORS Rich Cunningham [email protected] Oryctes nasicornis (Linné) from Saint- Barney Streit Venant, North of barneystreit@hotmail.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • IP Athos Renewable Energy Project, Plan of Development, Appendix D.2
    APPENDIX D.2 Plant Survey Memorandum Athos Memo Report To: Aspen Environmental Group From: Lehong Chow, Ironwood Consulting, Inc. Date: April 3, 2019 Re: Athos Supplemental Spring 2019 Botanical Surveys This memo report presents the methods and results for supplemental botanical surveys conducted for the Athos Solar Energy Project in March 2019 and supplements the Biological Resources Technical Report (BRTR; Ironwood 2019) which reported on field surveys conducted in 2018. BACKGROUND Botanical surveys were previously conducted in the spring and fall of 2018 for the entirety of the project site for the Athos Solar Energy Project (Athos). However, due to insufficient rain, many plant species did not germinate for proper identification during 2018 spring surveys. Fall surveys in 2018 were conducted only on a reconnaissance-level due to low levels of rain. Regional winter rainfall from the two nearest weather stations showed rainfall averaging at 0.1 inches during botanical surveys conducted in 2018 (Ironwood, 2019). In addition, gen-tie alignments have changed slightly and alternatives, access roads and spur roads have been added. PURPOSE The purpose of this survey was to survey all new additions and re-survey areas of interest including public lands (limited to portions of the gen-tie segments), parcels supporting native vegetation and habitat, and windblown sandy areas where sensitive plant species may occur. The private land parcels in current or former agricultural use were not surveyed (parcel groups A, B, C, E, and part of G). METHODS Survey Areas: The area surveyed for biological resources included the entirety of gen-tie routes (including alternates), spur roads, access roads on public land, parcels supporting native vegetation (parcel groups D and F), and areas covered by windblown sand where sensitive species may occur (portion of parcel group G).
    [Show full text]
  • Silver-Spotted Tiger Moth by Todd Murray
    Applegater Summer 2011 9 Notes from a Rogue entomologist: The Oregon state insect — A tale of pests, pollinators and politics BY RICHARD J. HILTON The official Oregon state insect life in the soil as larval grubs feeding on insect was dashed. So is the Oregon Swallowtail, Papilio roots. “Rufus the rain beetle” became the the beetle proponents oregonius, a classic yellow and black mascot for the cause, and a class of third- gamely searched for a butterfly that is native to the Pacific graders took up Rufus’s banner and went new candidate to carry Northwest, primarily found in the to the Oregon legislature to make the case. the torch. The goal Columbia River region where the However, it is reported that the appeared to be twofold: caterpillars feed on tarragon sagebrush. legislators responded in a supercilious firstly, find an insect that A brief survey of the state insect list shows manner, one observer noted that the was distinctly Oregon that 42 states have state insects and/or schoolchildren were better behaved than in nature that would state butterflies. In fact there are 11 states the representatives. I should note that most highlight our insect that have both a state butterfly and a state of the information that I have regarding this diversity; secondly, insect. Of the 56 insects recognized at the episode comes from rain beetle proponents, prevent the honeybee state level, 25 are butterflies and 17 states so I expect that their view may not be from becoming the state have the honeybee as their state insect. entirely unbiased.
    [Show full text]
  • DED Meadowfarmsada Signed (2).Pdf
    Meadow Farms ADA Project Inyo County, California DISTRICT 9 – INY – 395 (PM 117.3-117.9) 09-36680/0916000021 Initial Study with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration / Environmental Assessment Prepared by the State of California, Department of Transportation The environmental review, consultation, and any other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by Caltrans pursuant to 23 USC 327 and the Memorandum of Understanding dated December 23, 2016, and executed by FHWA and Caltrans. April 2020 General Information about This Document What’s in this document: The California Department of Transportation (Department), as assigned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), has prepared this Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA), which examines the potential environmental impacts of the alternatives being considered for the proposed project located in Inyo County, California. The Department is the lead agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Department is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The document tells you why the project is being proposed, what alternatives we have considered for the project, how the existing environment could be affected by the project, the potential impacts of each of the alternatives, and the proposed avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. What you should do: • Please read this document. • Additional copies of this document and the related technical studies are available for review at the Caltrans District 9 office located at 500 S. Main Street, Bishop, CA 93514. This document may be downloaded at the following website: https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-9 • We’d like to hear what you think.
    [Show full text]
  • Tesis Amarilla, Leonardo David.Pdf (5.496Mb)
    Universidad Nacional de Córdoba Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales Estudio Poblacional y Filogenético en Munroa (Poaceae, Chloridoideae) Lic. Leonardo David Amarilla Tesis para optar al grado de Doctor en Ciencias Biológicas Directora: Dra. Ana M. Anton Co-Director: Dr. Jorge O. Chiapella Asesora de Tesis: Dra. Victoria Sosa Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal CONICET-UNC Córdoba, Argentina 2014 Comisión Asesora de Tesis Dra. Ana M. Anton, IMBIV, Córdoba. Dra. Noemí Gardenal, IDEA, Córdoba. Dra. Liliana Giussani, IBODA, Buenos Aires. Defensa Oral y Pública Lugar y Fecha: Calificación: Tribunal evaluador de Tesis Firma………………………………… Aclaración…………………………………... Firma………………………………… Aclaración…………………………………... Firma………………………………… Aclaración…………………………………... “Tengamos ideales elevados y pensemos en alcanzar grandes cosas, porque como la vida rebaja siempre y no se logra sino una parte de lo que se ansía, soñando muy alto alcanzaremos mucho más” Bernardo Alberto Houssay A mis padres y hermanas Quiero expresar mi más profundo agradecimiento a mis directores de tesis, la Dra. Ana M. Anton y el Dr. Jorge O. Chiapella, por todo lo que me enseñaron en cuanto a sistemática y taxonomía de gramíneas, por sus consejos, acompañamiento y dedicación. De la misma manera, quiero agradecer a la Dra. Victoria Sosa (INECOL A.C., Veracruz, Xalapa, México) por su acompañamiento y por todo lo que me enseñó en cuando a filogeografía y genética de poblaciones. Además quiero agradecer… A mis compañeros de trabajo: Nicolás Nagahama, Raquel Scrivanti, Federico Robbiati, Lucia Castello, Jimena Nores, Marcelo Gritti. A los curadores y equipo técnico del Museo Botánico de Córdoba. A la Dra. Reneé Fortunato. A la Dra. Marcela M. Manifesto. A la Dra.
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Nevada Framework FEIS Chapter 3
    table of contrents Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment – Part 4.6 4.6. Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Fungi4.6. Fungi Introduction Part 3.1 of this chapter describes landscape-scale vegetation patterns. Part 3.2 describes the vegetative structure, function, and composition of old forest ecosystems, while Part 3.3 describes hardwood ecosystems and Part 3.4 describes aquatic, riparian, and meadow ecosystems. This part focuses on botanical diversity in the Sierra Nevada, beginning with an overview of botanical resources and then presenting a more detailed analysis of the rarest elements of the flora, the threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plants. The bryophytes (mosses and liverworts), lichens, and fungi of the Sierra have been little studied in comparison to the vascular flora. In the Pacific Northwest, studies of these groups have received increased attention due to the President’s Northwest Forest Plan. New and valuable scientific data is being revealed, some of which may apply to species in the Sierra Nevada. This section presents an overview of the vascular plant flora, followed by summaries of what is generally known about bryophytes, lichens, and fungi in the Sierra Nevada. Environmental Consequences of the alternatives are only analyzed for the Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive plants, which include vascular plants, several bryophytes, and one species of lichen. 4.6.1. Vascular plants4.6.1. plants The diversity of topography, geology, and elevation in the Sierra Nevada combine to create a remarkably diverse flora (see Section 3.1 for an overview of landscape patterns and vegetation dynamics in the Sierra Nevada). More than half of the approximately 5,000 native vascular plant species in California occur in the Sierra Nevada, despite the fact that the range contains less than 20 percent of the state’s land base (Shevock 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • 31762100112265.Pdf (8.634Mb)
    The genetics, nature and occurrence of self-and cross-incompatibility in four annual species of Coreopsis L. by Jagan Nath Sharma A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in GENETICS Montana State University © Copyright by Jagan Nath Sharma (1971) Abstract: Four annual species of Coreopsis L. (Compositae: Heliantheae: Coreop-sidinae), C. bigelovii. (A. Gray) H. M. Hall, C. calliopsidea (DC.) A. Gray, C. califomica (Nutt.) Sharsmith, and C. tinctoria Nutt., were studied to determine the genetics of their self-incompatibility mechanisms. Diallel -cross, backcross, and F2 studies revealed that these species have a sporo-phytic, multiple allelic, monogenic system of self-incompatibility. C. tinctoria had 7 multiple alleles, while C. bigelovii and C. califomica had 5 multiple alleles each. The number of multiple alleles could not be assigned to C. calliopsidea. Cytological studies' revealed a strong correlation between the sporophytic system of self-incompatibility and the stigma as the site of pollen inhibition. Meiotic chromosome numbers for all four species were determined as n=12. Secondary associations between different bivalents were found in all four species studied; these point toward some form of polyploidy associated with the genus. Significant heterosis for horticultural traits was detected and a method of producing F1 hybrid cultivars in Coreopsis tinctoria, using incompatibility as a technique, has been suggested. THE GENETICS, NATURE AND OCCURRENCE
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands 1996
    National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary Indicator by Region and Subregion Scientific Name/ North North Central South Inter- National Subregion Northeast Southeast Central Plains Plains Plains Southwest mountain Northwest California Alaska Caribbean Hawaii Indicator Range Abies amabilis (Dougl. ex Loud.) Dougl. ex Forbes FACU FACU UPL UPL,FACU Abies balsamea (L.) P. Mill. FAC FACW FAC,FACW Abies concolor (Gord. & Glend.) Lindl. ex Hildebr. NI NI NI NI NI UPL UPL Abies fraseri (Pursh) Poir. FACU FACU FACU Abies grandis (Dougl. ex D. Don) Lindl. FACU-* NI FACU-* Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt. NI NI FACU+ FACU- FACU FAC UPL UPL,FAC Abies magnifica A. Murr. NI UPL NI FACU UPL,FACU Abildgaardia ovata (Burm. f.) Kral FACW+ FAC+ FAC+,FACW+ Abutilon theophrasti Medik. UPL FACU- FACU- UPL UPL UPL UPL UPL NI NI UPL,FACU- Acacia choriophylla Benth. FAC* FAC* Acacia farnesiana (L.) Willd. FACU NI NI* NI NI FACU Acacia greggii Gray UPL UPL FACU FACU UPL,FACU Acacia macracantha Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd. NI FAC FAC Acacia minuta ssp. minuta (M.E. Jones) Beauchamp FACU FACU Acaena exigua Gray OBL OBL Acalypha bisetosa Bertol. ex Spreng. FACW FACW Acalypha virginica L. FACU- FACU- FAC- FACU- FACU- FACU* FACU-,FAC- Acalypha virginica var. rhomboidea (Raf.) Cooperrider FACU- FAC- FACU FACU- FACU- FACU* FACU-,FAC- Acanthocereus tetragonus (L.) Humm. FAC* NI NI FAC* Acanthomintha ilicifolia (Gray) Gray FAC* FAC* Acanthus ebracteatus Vahl OBL OBL Acer circinatum Pursh FAC- FAC NI FAC-,FAC Acer glabrum Torr. FAC FAC FAC FACU FACU* FAC FACU FACU*,FAC Acer grandidentatum Nutt.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Clickbook Booklet
    183 Liliaceae Yucca brevifolia joshua tree 5 184 Liliaceae Yucca schidigera Mohave yucca 99 1 Flora of New Dixie Mine Road Area, west of Landers Achnatherum 185 Poaceae ~ desert needlegrass 20 2 # Plants speciosum # JM Family ID? Scientific Name (*)Common Name Bloom #Vch six-weeks Obs'd 186 Poaceae Aristida adscensionis 50 99 22Oct10 three-awn 1 Pteridaceae Cheilanthes covillei beady lipfern 1 Aristida purpurea var. 187 Poaceae ssp Nealley three-awn 1 1 4 nealleyi Pentagramma 2 Pteridaceae ~ triangularis ssp. goldback fern 1 Bouteloua barbata var. 188 Poaceae six-weeks grama 20 50 10 triangularis barbata 3 Cupressaceae Juniperus californica California juniper 1 Bromus madritensis ssp. 189 Poaceae *red brome 99 2 rubens 4 Ephedraceae Ephedra californica desert tea 30 1 190 Poaceae Bromus trinii *Chilean chess 3 5 Ephedraceae Ephedra nevadensis Nevada ephedra 3 191 Poaceae Distichlis spicata saltgrass 1 6 Ephedraceae Ephedra viridis green ephedra 1 Elymus elymoides ssp. 7 Pinaceae Pinus monophylla pinyon pine 2 192 Poaceae squirreltail 2 elymoides 8 Amaranthaceae Amaranthus fimbriatus fringed amaranth 99 99 11 193 Poaceae Erioneuron pulchellum fluff grass 25 9 Apiaceae Lomatium mohavense Mojave lomatium 1 Hordeum vulgare var. 194 Poaceae *cultivated barley 1 Acamptopappus trifurcatum 10 Asteraceae ~ sphaerocephalus var. goldenhead 5 3 195 Poaceae Melica frutescens tall melica 2 sphaerocephalus 196 Poaceae Melica imperfecta coast-range melic 3 11 Asteraceae Adenophyllum cooperi Cooper's dogweed 5 20 2 197 Poaceae Muhlenbergia rigens deergrass 2 12 Asteraceae Ambrosia acanthicarpa bur-ragweed 1 198 Poaceae Pleuraphis rigida big galleta 10 99 11 13 Asteraceae Ambrosia dumosa burroweed 5 99 12 Poa secunda ssp.
    [Show full text]